In this format, a gloss is required, though, right? I think dictionary is was what needs to be fixed (and any others missing the gloss, using this template.) Perhaps the addition of an invisible "gloss-missing" cleanup category would be a better default? --Connel MacKenzie 21:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

That's not what the problematic edit was about; it was adding "Translations to be checked" as the section header if something was invalid (or something?). Using this (or top) without a gloss is fine in the simple cases where there is only one definition.

People are way too excited about this template, because they don't know how to do collapsible sections (which takes CSS). It was jus a demo, AND IS NOT READY TO BE USED ANYWHERE OTHER THAN AS A DEMO UNTIL THE CORRECT CSS WORK IS DONE!!! Robert Ullmann 21:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I apologize for jumping the gun. However, I understood it to require the parameter, nevertheless, so that translation sections that haven't been checked (for incorrect subdivisions) would not be present. Sorry for stepping on your toe. --Connel MacKenzie 21:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

You aren't stepping on my toe :-). But this template was and is a demo, a hack to show what could be done. It is not ready to be used, it needs serious CSS work (classes, preferences, etc. etc. etc.) and maybe should be subbed into top eventually. It certainly is not some general collapsible section template! (but people are so eager!) sigh Robert Ullmann 22:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Has anyone added this to WT:CUSTOM yet? Should I just try to figure out the CSS on my own, then plop it into WT:PREFS? --Connel MacKenzie 05:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it was poor documentation, or what. The current behavior is to count the number of navigation boxes on a rendered page. If one or less, the contents are exposed. In WT:PREFS I already have a "disable hiding" thing, which will expose the contents if more than zero appear. Obviously, something is amiss, as the nav boxes are hidden on pages such as WT:VOTE all the time. I'm tempted to overhaul that logic to make it dependent only on the user preference, and never on the number of nav frames appearing. This should really move to WT:GP now. --Connel MacKenzie 07:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Kinda still trying to figure out what to do; not helped by the fact that the net here has been so unreliable (I was going to extend my last comment above, but the net promptly went away. ;-) Robert Ullmann 11:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I now have the "Leave translation boxes ("Nav boxes") expanded on initial page load." checked, but they remain collapsed. __meco 18:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Don't blame my change, fix dictionary et al.! Or maybe I should say thanks for bringing it to attention, since "fix dictionary et al." is a bit unreasonable. The original intent was just to provide a way of listing TTBC under the same collapsible box. I didn't mean to mess up your translation workload.

I'm going to make a minor change to at least note which pages are incorrectly formatted. This will use a different category than the TTBC you rely on. After that there shouldn't be any need for a generic header, since that would be an incorrect use! I would hope that applying TTBC as the default at that point isn't as controversial. DAVilla 02:18, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The default parameter text, "Translations", doesn't make much sense, since it is an exact duplicate of the "Translations" section heading. I think it'd make more sense to put one of the wikivariables in there, probably the one for the current pagename (i.e. the term being defined.) — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib]ツ 00:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

The default parameter text should be an error! PAGENAME is not a valid gloss! DAVilla 02:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The template does not allow floats next to it, see parrot (or its history). Is there a reasonable solution for this?

The nav CSS stuff it uses defines a full width box, and when expanded it uses full width, so it has to appear below float-right boxes.

I’d like to note that maybe we should strike the screaming above, or is the template still not ready to be used? That would be strange, it is being substituted by bots now. H.(talk) 11:17, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

It just needs actual documentation above the discussion ;-) Robert Ullmann 15:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Can we move the Hide/Show link to the left side or make the entire bar clickable? On larger screens like mine, the link is far away from the rest of the content and when I move the mouse far over to click it, it often doesn't reveal much, making it seem like a waste to even be hidden in the first place. --DBN 01:37, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Is it possible to make an alt-click show or hide all of the translation boxes in a section, or in an entry? This would be analogous to the way the alt key works for minimize and close window controls on the Mac. —MichaelZ.2009-01-11 16:31 z

I think it would be possible, but fiddly, and, if the alt-click was not on the first translation box, it would cause everything visible to shift downwards horribly. Better to use the WT:PREF to not hide them, or if we had another "Expand All" button beside translations. Conrad.Irwin 17:11, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I am admin on the gothic wikipedia and would like to have such a box on a side to display the text in latin alphabet. Could someone explain, how this works? I have already copied the sections from Mediawiki:Common.css and .js and the Template, but still, there is just a box with a title and the text. No top-down menu, no clickable title to show the content, etc. Does anybody know, what I am doing wrong? Thank you veeery much. This is the link to the Template on the gothic wikipedia. Zylbath 12:10, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

There's a number of problems in Common.js that are causing it not to work. First of all, the first line of the page is just NavBars, which causes a ReferenceError, breaking the whole thing, so it wouldn't matter what the rest of the content was. Second, it attempts to use newNode without actually having it available. You would need to copy the newNode function from Mediawiki:Common.js to got:Mediawiki:Common.js for this to work. Third, the version of NavTables imported to gotwikt uses the VisibilityToggles script. Either the NavTables script needs to be modified to not use VisibilityToggles, or VisibilityToggles needs to be imported. --Yair rand 00:17, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I really thank you for your help for so far. I have no copied the VisibilityToggles script and the newMode function into the gothic common.js. I also changed the titles in the script by /*title*/. But still, it doesn't work. Is there maybe anything more to write in the script or have I done anything wrong? I would be really thankful if you answered again. Thank you very much. Zylbath 10:08, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

The Gothic Common.js has a else line at the beginning that is not preceded by a if, which is causing an error. This can be fixed by just removing the word else. Also, it looks like the VisibilityToggles script relies on the getCookie and setCookie functions, too. Once those two functions are imported and the first line is fixed, it should work, I think. --Yair rand 10:30, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello again. Which "else" do you mean? I cannot find a "else" where is no if behind. There was a "else" from another function I added to display the titles as real titles in javascript. But I took that out. I have now copied the both "Cookie" things, but still, the template isn't working. Maybe it's really because of the "else" I wasn't unable to find yet. Please give me another hind where it is. ;) Zylbath 21:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh, quelle miracle! I guess it was just because of my cache? Now it is running, uuuh how lucky I am. I really really really thank you for the big help. With a lucky and happy face, the best greets and liubos goleinis fram thizai wikipaidjai ana gutiskarazdai =) Zylbath 14:31, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps it would be helpful if the NavFrame had an ID attached to it, something like translations-(gloss), so that the tables could be linked to from templates like {{trans-see}}? --Yair rand (talk) 05:47, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

This breaks HTML validation in pages where there are duplicate IDs. For example, march has invalid HTML[1] because it has two divs with id="Translations-Translations_to_be_checked". (There are other validation problems, but they should all be fixed.)

Funny, I thought Mediawiki automatically changes one of the IDs by adding a number to the end if there are duplicates. Apparently not.

I suppose we could either modify {{checktrans-top}}, or add a function to trans-top to check if {1} equals "Translations to be checked" and not add an id if it does. Would there be any problems with either of those? --Yair rand (talk) 22:23, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

I think MediaWiki does that when it generates section-heading IDs from their titles, but not when we provide an ID.

I’m not familiar with the details of these templates, but anything that tries to make unique IDs sounds good to me. I suppose there may as many as one per English etymology on a page. Apart from the checktrans sections, I think other translation NavFrames should normally have unique headings. —MichaelZ.2013-06-04 23:10 z

It looks like this is an intermittant bug of unknown origin (unknown to me, anyway). I came here to complain about the same thing just now. By the time I started leaving a comment/question about it, the problem had cleared up. - dcljr (talk) 06:48, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

It would be nice having the auto-sort property, like the Template:der3 has. The sortable template could be called just Template:trans, and it would not need the Template:trans-top, Template:trans-mid, and Template:trans-bottom. I am not sure whether the sorting functionality inside the Template:der3 can be modularized to be used in the proposed new template.--Sae1962 (talk) 10:27, 8 February 2016 (UTC)